#terf logic makes no sense

[koshercosplay]

it's funny how terf logic somehow is like "if you say 'people with vaginas' or 'people who give birth' then you're reducing women to their genitals and women are so much more than that so you are actually being sexist by using that phrase"

While ALSO going "your genitals define who you are as a person so I don't care how you 'identify' or if you 'feel like' something else because having a vagina makes you a WOMAN and having a penis makes you a MAN and that is ALL YOU'LL EVER BE"

[trans-xianxian]

I'm watching a youtube video and they started talking about all the shit in harry potter that just didn't make any fuckin sense, and while I don't believe that the "the books have actually been bad this whole time" sentiment is helpful in the argument against jkr, it is sort of insane that for the like 20 years before she went fully mask off terf everyone just didn't question any of the wild inconsistencies in the books 😭

[giantkillerjack]

Just heard the news about WB telling Misha Collins to pretend he's bisexual.

I mean there's token representation and then there's "okay no homos onscreen but maybe if we make the actor queer." 🤣🤣🤣

[the-prophetess-and-the-trickster]

Honestly finding it funny the “gender critical” witches on tumblr are doing their absolute best to use their spirituality to preserve their ignorance. Like …. Hmmm wonder what that’s reminiscent of

[windsroad]

I’m sorry but in the notes of that post

In what way is being trans a pivotal aspect of the patriarchy. Girl what

[technicolorxsn]

going thru a terf blocking spree and it hurts seeing these somewhat intelligent women throw logic and reason out the window purely to hate people

[bynux]

Gender essentialism is a social cancer.

Just saw a post on Lex that was basically a transmasc person asking the queer community at large to stop excluding them because they pass as a cis man. They asked that we maybe stop coming down on trans men, masc NBs, hell, even trans women who don't know they're trans yet.

And…yeah. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask. Tbh I think that should also include cis men who aren't straight, because they are part of the LGBTQIA+ community.

I think what's vastly more important than whether someone has a masculine identity is whether or not they're explicitly being toxically masculine. Wanting more body hair isn't toxic, wanting a flat chest isn't toxic, wanting to enjoy more "masculine" activities and be seen as one of the guys isn't toxic. SIMPLY BEING A MAN IS NOT TOXIC.

Anytime I've seen someone insist otherwise, it's been someone closely tied to—if not within—radfem/TERF circles. The logic that leads people to say masculine traits == bad is the same as the logic that results in having penis == bad, yet for some reason the former is treated as common sense even in queer circles. We're supposed to be rejecting gender norms, not reinforcing them dammit.

What's bad, what's toxic, is possessiveness. Needless aggression. Unchecked jealousy. Entitlement (especially sexual entitlement). None of these are inherently masculine traits.

It's one thing to be cautious of cis men, who more often than not have accepted masculinity as the default rather than a conscious choice, and may have learned more toxic traits as a result. But you don't know who is or isn't trans.

You don't know how that "cis man" actually identifies. Even if you do, you don't know whether or not he's examined his gender identity and decided he's happy where he is. You don't know whether or not he's actually possessive or entitled or aggressive. Making such assumptions is no better than assuming that a woman will be shy and submissive.

You don't know, and it's not your place to decide.

[thedelusionreaderbitch]

Poly! Jegulus x gn! Reader - When there is no logic, look deeper

A/n: I decided to go with a different analogy for James's and Regulus's relation than I normally do (and what everyone else normally does.) So have fun with this little drabble!

Summary: Your relationship with James and Regulus through Remus's perspective.

Warnings: Swearing, brief mentions of child abuse, brief mentions of mental health issues (if you squint,) I think that's it? You have been warned!

The Three P's:

[Pronouns used: you/your] [Pov: 2nd person] [Pairings: (romantic!) (poly!) jegulus x reader, (romantic!) wolfstar, (platonic!) marauders]

I do NOT support J. K. Rowling, or any transphobic/homophobic things she says (or anything she says really), or TERFS!

Regulus and James fit together, in a neat messy puzzle. James's darker skin contrasting with Regulus's more pale, like the sun and it's moon. Recently, Remus had been reading some muggle plays of man named Shakespeare, and just by looking at the two, he could tell that he would've written down every piece of their love story, until he knew it by heart.

The enigma, the question, he just couldn't find the answer to was you, because Regulus and James were different sides of the same coin. Slytherin and Gryffindor, light and dark, sun and moon. You just didn't fit as nicely into the big picture.

That's what he used to think anyway, before the marauders and everyone else had gotten to know you. To Remus, he used to think of you as a temporary escape for the two boys, as you were the only one out of the three who had a normal life. It was harsh, but it was the only answer to the equation he could come up with.

Remus's life hadn't been full of answers, maybe that's why he tried to find the solution, so there would be no more variables. So he didn't have to attempt to find the solution later, when they most needed it most. So maybe, just once his life could be left with more answers than questions.

Action reaction, like getting bit by a werewolf - he was one of them now. Finding Sirius, James, and Peter on the train - becoming friends. Gaining feelings for Padfoot, confessing them and becoming a couple. (Okay, maybe there were multiple steps to that equation.) Everything had a solution, something he liked to find to keep himself sane. When everything else in his life was swirled with insanity.

You fitting into the equation didn't follow a path of logic, it was completely and utterly crazy.

Now, he sees what he didn't before, the way you would stay with James even when the smile slipped from his lips. How you would listen to Regulus, and give him space to talk about his family troubles, why he stayed.

You would let James cry, and make Regulus giggle, the planets didn't just revolve around the sun now. Now the moon and it's star revolved around you.

You were a nebula, because when a person looked at you, they gasped in wonder. Everything unknown and beautiful was you, a glittering cloud of normalcy and love. Nurturing but fleeting if need be.

One time, Sirius said he and his brother were the stars, and you only laughed, shaking your head.

"Regulus is like the moon, for so long we thought we couldn't reach him, until we did."

Remus's boyfriend looked startled, Remus could agree with the feeling. How had you, just made sense of someone so complex, with so many strings and layers, with just a sentence?

The werewolf wanted to see how you would respond if he asked you about everybody at Hogwarts, about the ministry, his family. Instead, he asked you about your other boyfriend.

"James?" You smiled softly, and for some reason it warmed Remus's heart, that when you thought about his friend, you immediately were happy. As if just thinking about him was enough to revel in his sunlight.

"James is the sun, he's bright, but sometimes his brilliance gets the peoples eyes, it can annoy them. Until he gets farther away." You still had a pleasant look upon your face, but your eyes were brightly alight with sadness. "Then it's winter, and they long for summer again, because then the sun could be there to warm them a second time. Regardless of its blinding sunlight."

Remus thinks, that was the moment that he started to understand why James and Regulus had both fallen for you. You were the beautiful unknown, a nebula, out of reach, but oh, so beautiful to gaze upon.

Remus still didn't quite comprehend how you fit into the grand scheme of things, but he thinks, he starting to see the big picture.

Words 670

-thedelusionreaderbitch

Hp Taglist: @regulusblackswhorecrux

[velvetvexations]

The thing about man vs. bear gender essentialism is that it makes no sense to say cis men are inherently dangerous for being cis men but to also reject the TERF concept of "male socialization". Like, yes, there's the more esoteric point that telling cis women they're right to be so paranoid about the possibility of being alone with people they may deem men is counterproductive, but it's also just literally actually a TERF line. You cannot say you'd prefer to meet a bear over a man in the woods, say trans women aren't dangerous for being raised as boys, and be logically consistent.

[transmascpetewentz]

One Challenge For People Who Deny Transandrophobia

I have one challenge for anyone and everyone who denies transandrophobia for any reason that has to do with transmasc advocacy allegedly harming trans women. Seeing as you all are very adamant in your stance against trans men demanding basic respect in queer spaces, this should not be difficult for you to do if you have thought about your reasoning for holding such opinions.

My challenge for all of you is to answer this one question:

What is one way that transmasc activism harms trans women directly, or is transmisogynistic in some way?

Now, because I know that some people will put together words that don't make sense to avoid answering the question but sound intellectual, here are some logical fallacies that your answer must avoid for me to consider it completing the challenge:

You must not include any criticism of the word transandrophobia that does not meaningfully engage with the activism and discussions that trans men have been having.

No comparisons to any sort of hate groups (MRAs, TERFs, etc). Point out the specific ideas that you disagree with instead of saying "this is just like [x]."

You cannot cherry-pick the concept of intersectionality or cite any particular white woman's interpretation of the ideas proposed by Kimberle Crenshaw to discredit transmasc advocacy without engaging with the new ideas we have put forth.

No whataboutisms; do not base your argument around the idea that trans women should be centered in trans men's spaces and discussions.

Avoid making use of a strawman. Try to think of the most compelling argument you've seen for the existence of transandrophobia and refute that instead of trying to attack the weakest possible argument (that probably hasn't been made in good faith).

Acknowledge the fact that closeted, non-passing, and passing trans men exist, and do not treat non-passing trans men as having a less legitimate male or trans experience than those who pass. Don't bring up passing trans men to say that all trans men have male privilege, because just like trans women, trans men who pass still face transphobia.

No projection of cisgender dynamics of gender and sexuality onto trans spaces, as while those aren't totally irrelevant, they are irrelevant to whether or not transandrophobia is a thing that exists.

Acknowledge that trans men are oppressed by misogyny, just like trans women and transfems are. Also, acknowledge the existence of intersex trans men and trans men of color.

Don't bring up individual trans men who have done certain bad things that do not implicate the entire area of transmasc activism or transandrophobia theory.

Do not mention Israel or Palestine, or bring up other irrelevant issues that you may disagree with me or other prominent trans men in these spaces on.

As stated, all that I am looking for is one (1) argument. I have searched through a lot of posts, a lot of articles about this subject, yet I have not found one coherent argument that avoids basic logical fallacies and doesn't just throw words together to sound like it's refuting anything. I can and will respond to all of the arguments that I get that fit this criteria. You can send them to me in asks or in the notes of this post.

[self-winding]

One of my Twitter moots from a previous fandom has gone full TERF.

For some reason they’re still following me even though I tweet about trans stuff, and I’m still following them because I’m morbidly fascinated by their unhinged takes and the takes of people in their orbit.

Like, there’s some tweet from a trans woman about how she carries tampons in her purse because some of her trans masc friends might need one and they don’t usually carry tampons, and the reaction from Terftown is “this is manipulative and predatory male behavior because men want to feel powerful by rescuing damsels in distress.”

Or like, there’s a news story about a masculine nonbinary (presumably afab) person who now gets mistaken for a man after a double mastectomy and has been confronted when they try to use the women’s toilet, and the reaction is “Clearly this person is actually a secret man.  They look male to me.  Men can get breast cancer too!  They say they found the lump when they were playing with their own breast?  No REAL WOMAN would do that!” (uh, what?) 

It’s a rabbit hole of paranoia and anger and seeing deception and predation everywhere.  But the thing is, a lot of it doesn’t sound that different from the unhinged takes I hear from trans-friendly “normal” feminists.  It’s just that "normal” feminists (the more extreme ones, anyway) direct this anger and paranoia exclusively toward cis men.  The disagreement between them and TERFs is merely who does or doesn’t count as a man.  The core attitude of “this group is out to get us and we must be constantly vigilant against them” is the same, and results in the same kind of moon-logic where every innocuous gesture or individual action from a bad actor becomes a sinister psyop of the collective.

If you believe that men as a class are constantly scheming ways to control and subjugate women and invade their spaces and make them doubt their own perceptions of reality, it makes total sense that some men would pretend to be women in order to do this.  In a way, TERFs are more consistent about this than other radfems.  But they’re consistently wrong because the premise is flawed to begin with.

And yeah, I’ve also seen plenty of this stuff directed toward women in the more toxic MRA and redpill circles.  I’m just more familiar with the feminist manifestations of this attitude.

Seeing an entire gender or entire sex as an oppressor/enemy class is the mindkiller.

[historicity-was-already-taken]

Left in response to this post.

Just to make sure I'm following your logic, the fact that a fascist government of a country I do not live in or have anything to do with on the other side of the world says that it represents all Jews, I as a Jewish American citizen, am complicit in said state's war crimes?

Why? Do you hold all diasporic Indonesians responsible for the genocide that country is committing in West Papua? Do you hold all Buddhists accountable for the genocide of the Rohingya in Myanmar? Do you think an international cabal of Jews plotted to make sure Germany lost World War I and agitated for its territorial dismemberment 1919? Do you think I, as an American Jewish person born in 1989, must answer for that Jewish stab in the back? Are you a proponent of collective responsibility and harassment directed at The Jews, to be understood as a body loyal to each other above all else across international lines?

Also, just so you know, I'm a bi woman who has been harassed in this space by TERFs who were furious over my insistence on the term "gender history," over "women's history." But however strangled their logic and violent their language, their nonsense still made more sense than this comment.

[happystings]

the funny thing about terfs/radfems is that they'll tell you that you "can't be aromantic/asexual because it goes against human nature," but isn't that *exactly* what homophobes say about gay people? that you *have* to be attracted to someone of the same sex, because otherwise you won't be able to have kids, and that goes against the laws of nature? According to their logic, gay people shouldn't exist either.

Continuing to use their logic, this means that if a lesbian was attracted to a trans woman, that would be okay, because "according to basic biology", they're just "men dressed as women" (false), so they could have kids. but a lesbian being attracted to a cis woman is not okay, because they can't have kids together without extra steps involved.

The fucked up logic of terfs and radfems quite literally doesn't add up. None of it makes any sense, because it all goes against each other.

So yeah, aromantic/asexual people are totally valid, just as valid as lesbians and gay men.

[jewishvitya]

TERFs will go "when I hide my opinions in terminology that non-radfems don't see for what it is, they agree with me! It just shows my ideas make sense and they're only against me because they got convinced I'm bad for no reason!" as if that's not the exact same logic that neo nazis use.

[olderthannetfic]

https://olderthannetfic.tumblr.com/post/743753323453300736/sense-of-place-i-can-get-with-hp-but-no-ive#notes

Ok listen to anyone reading tho, Voldermort? What the fuck even was that? Rant incoming, keep in mind this is over the top because of how tired I got after 10+ years of people constantly claiming what a fucking good villain Voldermort is just for being from HP. And also the absolutely obnoxious amount of people who used constantly compare literally any "ebil politician from eeby deeby" to Voldermort, before JRK went full mask off terf and misandrist weirdo.

What a shitty ass villain is Voldemort fr fr? Dude gets hyped since book 1 to be some kinda super charisma mastermind, then you meet his edgy emo teen version, people fucking raving. Then? Then book 4-5? One of those, drops one of the most boring ass bitch villains with a shitass excuse. What the fuck was that geriatric snake tiddy sucking fella? Where's the charisma everyone claimed was built up in the previous books? That dude had the charisma of a wrecking ball hitting the local orphanage puppy bakery for nice lil grandmas. If there is something lower than underwhelmed, that's me when I heard about that insult to our beloved snek kind. Leave me alone, snakes are fucking baller. 🐍

No charisma, and his world domination plan was fucking stupid. What the fuck? What a underwhelming villain. The logic for his weird magical racial purity shit was not consistent. Like you'd think a genocidal ethnonationalist maniac would make for an intimidating villain, but that dude couldn't walk up a set of stairs without falling flat on his ass from incompetence.

I'm not surprised that pink cat lady Umbridge is seen as a worse person, yeah yeah you could have a teacher who's a bitch like her, but you'll probably never meet a genocidal dumbass like Voldemort. But fr, Voldermort is just not fucking intimidating and so much of the things that JKR wrote him doing and planning are just fucking stupid. Like, all his lil edgy masked sidekicks have more evil energy, while he's just kinda there, failing. And then they ain't even loyal, because they were fucking kids when they joined him, congrats your army of edgy mask wearers can't even deal with a school of teens.

--

[butchbarbieagainstterfs]

whenever terfs claim that trans men transition due to wanting to "escape" misogyny and harrassment/sexual assault my eyes roll into the back of my skull so bad i go blind. because if you unpack it step by step it makes NO sense.

okay, a trans guy is trans bc he wants to escape harrasment and sexualization from men. but men can and do sexually assault other men, so that doesn't work. also someone being openly trans is at MORE risk of harrassment. and by their logic, clearly they can always tell who's trans and who's cis, so the predators will always know they're a "woman", therefore this argument is faulty. in addition, since it's so easy to become and trans and escape abuse like they claim, how come did most women not become trans? clearly misogyny has been there for centuries, so women from the very beginning could have just pretended to be men! literally the deeper you go into this, the more this shitty argument falls apart lmao

They do legit say trans men from the past were just women pretending to be men…but also say “you can always tell”. And like back then hormones and surgeries and such weren’t a thing so like ??? 💀

Also if you tell them “well transition then” often they’ll go off on this tangent about a) body mutilation but also b) how it doesn’t work and transitioning doesn’t actually mean you escape misogyny so like…why do trans men do it then? Bc it can’t be the terf reason of trying to escape misogyny if that’s not what actually happens? They can’t ever give a solid answer 💀